I suggest that the ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ option could be greatly improved by making it more flexible. Rather than the current ‘all or nothing’ option, there could be an ‘All’ mode (the status quo) and a ‘Selective’ mode allowing the required types to be chosen. This would then just need something like a boolean array to be scanned to see which event types are actually required. ‘Teaching your grandmother to suck eggs’ comes to mind here :)). So, in my case I could select ‘Volume’, and maybe ‘Pan’, and have the initial parameters reflect only the fader and pan positions of my initial rough mix. Much neater than having to have all of the redundant stuff in there.
As a test, I’ve just created a new project containing one track and selected ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’. This created 25 automation lines, most of which I would never use. This means that a project containing 100 tracks would have 2,500 mostly redundant automation lines in it - a real mess when using ‘Show All Used Automation’.
-Move faders/parameters at your liking to obtain a ruff mix.
-After you are satisfied with that, you would want the system to scan all parameters that you have touched, and write initial parameters for these. (For all parameters that are not @ 0 would also be an option, but then you will miss the parameters you have touched, but set back to 0 - To be discussed)
+1
I’m happy to read that other Nuendo-users also think that Nuendo’s Automation System needs some updating, and I would really appreciate a new feature which -indeed- writes “Initial Values” for selected parameters only…for starters.
Although there are ‘workable’ workarounds like writing IV’s in templates (which I use) and the “fill to” -features, I still think Nuendo’s automation system needs a more modern/flexible approach
Please refer to a similar thread I started a year ago:
OK. Let’s take this a step further.
Building AI that is scanning the whole system, looking for parameters that aren’t at default value will be pretty complicated, and it will slow down the system/procedure. So why don’t we work the other way around and virtually memorize each parameter that the user has modified.
This is how it could work:
-Move a fader from 0dB to -6dB
====>>> The system registers that the fader (and only the fader) has been moved and that the fader is now @ -6dB
Later, when creating initial parameters, the system knows excatly which parameters have been changed and at what value they are.
I hope I’m not speaking out of turn, but I would really welcome a feature like you’re describing here Fredo.
Actually, the “remembering which parameters have been changed”-functionality is already built into Nuendo: in Automation Preview-mode one has to touch the desired parameter I order to “arm” this parameter for previewing, maybe this method can be copied?
I would like such kind of approach for this requested feature called “Write IV to selected (touched) parameters.”
It’s simple; the system I describe (memorizing all changed parameters) is no different to the automation system we have now. Instead of making it “invisible” to the user, and “reveal” it later (the writing initial parameters for the changed parameters) you can do that with the current automation system.
As said, writing automation with “To start” and “to end” locked is no different to “freely” move faders/parameters. Only the changed values will have an automation point written at the start and at the end of your project. Which is exactly the same as creating these points at a later stage. No extra features needed, no doubled-up, invisible automation system needed.
When done (the point where is asked to write initial parameters), you just unlock the “to start” and “to end”, and you can continue working.
Although I appreciate the insights written above, I am afraid the workflow being described isn’t exactly what I pictured in my head.
Like I mentioned more than a year ago, the “Create Initial Values”-feature, as it stands now, creates dozens of automation-tracks which ARE handy when you want a 100% locked state of your automatable parameters, but , because of these dozens of (static) automation-tracks, it lacks a clean, neat overview…especially when you use “Show All Used Automation”. I find it very annoying to have all these (not applicable) tracks visible when I start writing my first passes of automation.
The workflow mentioned above is a great suggestion if a user wants Initial-Values-for-selected-parameters-only on a track-by-track-basis, but isn’t a great solution if a user wants Initial-Values-for-selected-parameters-only for his/her entire project.
I think everyone knows the moment that he/she has set their rough mix, and is ready for their first automation pass. That’s the moment I would like to have this new function which lets me (somehow) write Initial Values for parameters which I could select from a list or “collect” by touching them.
The other way around though, would be: build a quick (or better: intelligent) filter into the “Show All Used Automation” , which knows that 90% of the shown Automation Tracks are not applicable, if used in the “traditional” way.
I think Nuendo’s automation system will really benefit from this new approach.
Although I am trying hard to understand you, I really don’t see the point.
You want a “create inital parameters for a user-selected- specific parameters”.
I see the reasoning behind it. You want to use this to avoid chaos when selecting “Show all used automation”.
This however is no solution. Say you activate “Write EQ parameters” on a 500+ track project. It will create the exact same chaos.
The most convenient solution is to create inital parameters for all parameters you have touched.
(As suggested: Lock “To Front” & “To End” with Write automation “on”.)
From then on, you just mix your song using the automation system and creating parameters only for the stuff use use. Not one not-needed automation value will be written.
We can argue about this untill the sky falls on our head.
The main difference in thinking is that some of you want the system changed & tailored to their personal way of working, while I propose a slightly different way of working that you can use NOW.
But how is that any different from the options you already have?
Look, you either want “initial parameters” or not. I honestly don’t see why you would want it only for some tracks and not for others for any given parameter. Surely whatever the benefit is from having for example an initial level automation parameter on the kick drum track you would have the same benefit on the snare track. And if there’s a benefit to having EQ parameters on the Vocal then why not also the Bass? So like Fredo says once you write for X amount of tracks the “Show All” creates the same problem regardless of how you did it.
Secondly though, even if you only want it for some tracks and some parameters, what’s the difference between doing what Fredo says and instead stopping playback etc and manually retouching parameters to collect them to print those initial values? You’ve already touched them when you “set your rough mix”, right?
I do now understand and agree with Fredo and Mattias.
I’ve been testing the ‘To Start’-To End’ automation mode and it really does work well for getting a first rough mix, and for fine-tuning that mix, as long as you don’t forget to turn ‘Write’ off and start twiddling plugin knobs as I did. Ended up with a mass of daft automation!
I still think that the ‘Create Initial Parameter Events’ option could benefit from have some selectable options, but the above method does work well.